19 files changed, 329 insertions(+), 107 deletions(-)

M BROWSER.md
M CHANGELOG.md
M CLAUDE.md
M CONTRIBUTING.md
M SKILL.md
M browse/SKILL.md
M browse/src/read-commands.ts
M browse/test/commands.test.ts
M plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md
M plan-eng-review/SKILL.md
M qa-only/SKILL.md
M qa/SKILL.md
M retro/SKILL.md
M review/SKILL.md
M scripts/gen-skill-docs.ts
M setup-browser-cookies/SKILL.md
M ship/SKILL.md
M test/skill-e2e.test.ts
M test/skill-validation.test.ts

@@ 127,6 127,18 @@ The `console`, `network`, and `dialog` commands read from the in-memory buffers,
 
 Dialogs (alert, confirm, prompt) are auto-accepted by default to prevent browser lockup. The `dialog-accept` and `dialog-dismiss` commands control this behavior. For prompts, `dialog-accept <text>` provides the response text. All dialogs are logged to the dialog buffer with type, message, and action taken.
 
+### JavaScript execution (`js` and `eval`)
+
+`js` runs a single expression, `eval` runs a JS file. Both support `await` — expressions containing `await` are automatically wrapped in an async context:
+
+```bash
+$B js "await fetch('/api/data').then(r => r.json())"  # works
+$B js "document.title"                                  # also works (no wrapping needed)
+$B eval my-script.js                                    # file with await works too
+```
+
+For `eval` files, single-line files return the expression value directly. Multi-line files need explicit `return` when using `await`. Comments containing "await" don't trigger wrapping.
+
 ### Multi-workspace support
 
 Each workspace gets its own isolated browser instance with its own Chromium process, tabs, cookies, and logs. State is stored in `.gstack/` inside the project root (detected via `git rev-parse --show-toplevel`).

@@ 2,6 2,8 @@
 
 ## 0.4.2 — 2026-03-16
 
+- **`$B js "await fetch(...)"` now just works.** Any `await` expression in `$B js` or `$B eval` is automatically wrapped in an async context. No more `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions`. Single-line eval files return values directly; multi-line files use explicit `return`.
+- **Contributor mode now reflects, not just reacts.** Instead of only filing reports when something breaks, contributor mode now prompts periodic reflection: "Rate your gstack experience 0-10. Not a 10? Think about why." Catches quality-of-life issues and friction that passive detection misses. Reports now include a 0-10 rating and "What would make this a 10" to focus on actionable improvements.
 - **Skills now respect your branch target.** `/ship`, `/review`, `/qa`, and `/plan-ceo-review` detect which branch your PR actually targets instead of assuming `main`. Stacked branches, Conductor workspaces targeting feature branches, and repos using `master` all just work now.
 - **`/retro` works on any default branch.** Repos using `master`, `develop`, or other default branch names are detected automatically — no more empty retros because the branch name was wrong.
 - **New `{{BASE_BRANCH_DETECT}}` placeholder** for skill authors — drop it into any template and get 3-step branch detection (PR base → repo default → fallback) for free.


@@ 9,6 11,10 @@
 
 ### For contributors
 
+- Added `hasAwait()` helper with comment-stripping to avoid false positives on `// await` in eval files.
+- Smart eval wrapping: single-line → expression `(...)`, multi-line → block `{...}` with explicit `return`.
+- 6 new async wrapping unit tests, 40 new contributor mode preamble validation tests.
+- Calibration example framed as historical ("used to fail") to avoid implying a live bug post-fix.
 - Added "Writing SKILL templates" section to CLAUDE.md — rules for natural language over bash-isms, dynamic branch detection, self-contained code blocks.
 - Hardcoded-main regression test scans all `.tmpl` files for git commands with hardcoded `main`.
 - QA template cleaned up: removed `REPORT_DIR` shell variable, simplified port detection to prose.

@@ 118,6 118,21 @@ CHANGELOG.md is **for users**, not contributors. Write it like product release n
 - No jargon: say "every question now tells you which project and branch you're in" not
   "AskUserQuestion format standardized across skill templates via preamble resolver."
 
+## E2E eval failure blame protocol
+
+When an E2E eval fails during `/ship` or any other workflow, **never claim "not
+related to our changes" without proving it.** These systems have invisible couplings —
+a preamble text change affects agent behavior, a new helper changes timing, a
+regenerated SKILL.md shifts prompt context.
+
+**Required before attributing a failure to "pre-existing":**
+1. Run the same eval on main (or base branch) and show it fails there too
+2. If it passes on main but fails on the branch — it IS your change. Trace the blame.
+3. If you can't run on main, say "unverified — may or may not be related" and flag it
+   as a risk in the PR body
+
+"Pre-existing" without receipts is a lazy claim. Prove it or don't say it.
+
 ## Deploying to the active skill
 
 The active skill lives at `~/.claude/skills/gstack/`. After making changes:

@@ 22,9 22,11 @@ bin/dev-teardown               # deactivate — back to your global install
 
 ## Contributor mode
 
-Contributor mode is for people who want to fix gstack when it annoys them. Enable it
-and Claude Code will automatically log issues to `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/` as you
-work — what you were doing, what went wrong, repro steps, raw output.
+Contributor mode turns gstack into a self-improving tool. Enable it and Claude Code
+will periodically reflect on its gstack experience — rating it 0-10 at the end of
+each major workflow step. When something isn't a 10, it thinks about why and files
+a report to `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/` with what happened, repro steps, and what
+would make it better.
 
 ```bash
 ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config set gstack_contributor true


@@ 36,7 38,7 @@ the issue, fix it, and open a PR.
 
 ### The contributor workflow
 
-1. **Hit friction while using gstack** — contributor mode logs it automatically
+1. **Use gstack normally** — contributor mode reflects and logs issues automatically
 2. **Check your logs:** `ls ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/`
 3. **Fork and clone gstack** (if you haven't already)
 4. **Symlink your fork into the project where you hit the bug:**

@@ 44,12 44,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 58,20 61,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 # gstack browse: QA Testing & Dogfooding
 

@@ 44,12 44,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 58,20 61,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 # browse: QA Testing & Dogfooding
 

@@ 11,6 11,12 @@ import type { Page } from 'playwright';
 import * as fs from 'fs';
 import * as path from 'path';
 
+/** Detect await keyword, ignoring comments. Accepted risk: await in string literals triggers wrapping (harmless). */
+function hasAwait(code: string): boolean {
+  const stripped = code.replace(/\/\/.*$/gm, '').replace(/\/\*[\s\S]*?\*\//g, '');
+  return /\bawait\b/.test(stripped);
+}
+
 // Security: Path validation to prevent path traversal attacks
 const SAFE_DIRECTORIES = ['/tmp', process.cwd()];
 


@@ 118,7 124,8 @@ export async function handleReadCommand(
     case 'js': {
       const expr = args[0];
       if (!expr) throw new Error('Usage: browse js <expression>');
-      const result = await page.evaluate(expr);
+      const wrapped = hasAwait(expr) ? `(async()=>(${expr}))()` : expr;
+      const result = await page.evaluate(wrapped);
       return typeof result === 'object' ? JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) : String(result ?? '');
     }
 


@@ 128,6 135,13 @@ export async function handleReadCommand(
       validateReadPath(filePath);
       if (!fs.existsSync(filePath)) throw new Error(`File not found: ${filePath}`);
       const code = fs.readFileSync(filePath, 'utf-8');
+      if (hasAwait(code)) {
+        const trimmed = code.trim();
+        const isSingleExpr = trimmed.split('\n').length === 1;
+        const wrapped = isSingleExpr ? `(async()=>(${trimmed}))()` : `(async()=>{\n${code}\n})()`;
+        const result = await page.evaluate(wrapped);
+        return typeof result === 'object' ? JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) : String(result ?? '');
+      }
       const result = await page.evaluate(code);
       return typeof result === 'object' ? JSON.stringify(result, null, 2) : String(result ?? '');
     }

@@ 144,6 144,60 @@ describe('Inspection', () => {
     expect(obj.b).toBe(2);
   });
 
+  test('js supports await expressions', async () => {
+    const result = await handleReadCommand('js', ['await Promise.resolve(42)'], bm);
+    expect(result).toBe('42');
+  });
+
+  test('js does not false-positive on await substring', async () => {
+    const result = await handleReadCommand('js', ['(() => { const awaitable = 5; return awaitable })()'], bm);
+    expect(result).toBe('5');
+  });
+
+  test('eval supports await in single-line file', async () => {
+    const tmp = '/tmp/eval-await-test.js';
+    fs.writeFileSync(tmp, 'await Promise.resolve("hello from eval")');
+    try {
+      const result = await handleReadCommand('eval', [tmp], bm);
+      expect(result).toBe('hello from eval');
+    } finally {
+      fs.unlinkSync(tmp);
+    }
+  });
+
+  test('eval does not wrap when await is only in a comment', async () => {
+    const tmp = '/tmp/eval-comment-test.js';
+    fs.writeFileSync(tmp, '// no need to await this\ndocument.title');
+    try {
+      const result = await handleReadCommand('eval', [tmp], bm);
+      expect(result).toBe('Test Page - Basic');
+    } finally {
+      fs.unlinkSync(tmp);
+    }
+  });
+
+  test('eval multi-line with await and explicit return', async () => {
+    const tmp = '/tmp/eval-multiline-await.js';
+    fs.writeFileSync(tmp, 'const data = await Promise.resolve("multi");\nreturn data;');
+    try {
+      const result = await handleReadCommand('eval', [tmp], bm);
+      expect(result).toBe('multi');
+    } finally {
+      fs.unlinkSync(tmp);
+    }
+  });
+
+  test('eval multi-line with await but no return gives empty string', async () => {
+    const tmp = '/tmp/eval-multiline-no-return.js';
+    fs.writeFileSync(tmp, 'const data = await Promise.resolve("lost");\ndata;');
+    try {
+      const result = await handleReadCommand('eval', [tmp], bm);
+      expect(result).toBe('');
+    } finally {
+      fs.unlinkSync(tmp);
+    }
+  });
+
   test('css returns computed property', async () => {
     const result = await handleReadCommand('css', ['h1', 'color'], bm);
     // Navy color

@@ 44,12 44,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 58,20 61,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 ## Step 0: Detect base branch
 

@@ 44,12 44,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 58,20 61,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 # Plan Review Mode
 

@@ 43,12 43,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 57,20 60,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 # /qa-only: Report-Only QA Testing
 

@@ 48,12 48,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 62,20 65,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 ## Step 0: Detect base branch
 

@@ 43,12 43,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 57,20 60,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 ## Detect default branch
 

@@ 44,12 44,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 58,20 61,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 ## Step 0: Detect base branch
 

@@ 123,12 123,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If \`_CONTRIB\` is \`true\`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If \`_CONTRIB\` is \`true\`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write \`~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md\` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, \`$B js "await fetch(...)"\` used to fail with \`SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions\` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write \`~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md\` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 \`\`\`
 # {Title}


@@ 137,20 140,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+\`\`\`
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+\`\`\`
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 \`\`\`
 
-Then run: \`mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md\`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. \`browse-snapshot-ref-gap\`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"`;
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. \`browse-js-no-await\`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"`;
 }
 
 function generateBrowseSetup(): string {

@@ 41,12 41,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 55,20 58,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 # Setup Browser Cookies
 

@@ 43,12 43,15 @@ Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseli
 
 ## Contributor Mode
 
-If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. When you hit friction with **gstack itself** (not the user's app), file a field report. Think: "hey, I was trying to do X with gstack and it didn't work / was confusing / was annoying. Here's what happened."
+If `_CONTRIB` is `true`: you are in **contributor mode**. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.
 
-**gstack issues:** browse command fails/wrong output, snapshot missing elements, skill instructions unclear or misleading, binary crash/hang, unhelpful error message, any rough edge or annoyance — even minor stuff.
-**NOT gstack issues:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site.
+**At the end of each major workflow step** (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!
 
-**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with this structure:
+**Calibration — this is the bar:** For example, `$B js "await fetch(...)"` used to fail with `SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions` because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.
+
+**NOT worth filing:** user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.
+
+**To file:** write `~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md` with **all sections below** (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):
 
 ```
 # {Title}


@@ 57,20 60,23 @@ Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:
 
 **What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
 **What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
-**How annoying (1-5):** {1=meh, 3=friction, 5=blocker}
+**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}
 
 ## Steps to reproduce
 1. {step}
 
 ## Raw output
-(wrap any error messages or unexpected output in a markdown code block)
+```
+{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}
+```
+
+## What would make this a 10
+{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}
 
 **Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}
 ```
 
-Then run: `mkdir -p ~/.gstack/contributor-logs && open ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md`
-
-Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-snapshot-ref-gap`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
+Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. `browse-js-no-await`). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"
 
 ## Step 0: Detect base branch
 

@@ 13,6 13,11 @@ import * as os from 'os';
 const ROOT = path.resolve(import.meta.dir, '..');
 
 // Skip unless EVALS=1. Session runner strips CLAUDE* env vars to avoid nested session issues.
+//
+// BLAME PROTOCOL: When an eval fails, do NOT claim "pre-existing" or "not related
+// to our changes" without proof. Run the same eval on main to verify. These tests
+// have invisible couplings — preamble text, SKILL.md content, and timing all affect
+// agent behavior. See CLAUDE.md "E2E eval failure blame protocol" for details.
 const evalsEnabled = !!process.env.EVALS;
 const describeE2E = evalsEnabled ? describe : describe.skip;
 


@@ 322,10 327,16 @@ File a contributor report about this issue. Then tell me what you filed.`,
     const logFiles = fs.readdirSync(logsDir).filter(f => f.endsWith('.md'));
     expect(logFiles.length).toBeGreaterThan(0);
 
+    // Verify new reflection-based format
     const logContent = fs.readFileSync(path.join(logsDir, logFiles[0]), 'utf-8');
     expect(logContent).toContain('Hey gstack team');
     expect(logContent).toContain('What I was trying to do');
     expect(logContent).toContain('What happened instead');
+    expect(logContent).toMatch(/rating/i);
+    // Verify report has repro steps (agent may use "Steps to reproduce", "Repro Steps", etc.)
+    expect(logContent).toMatch(/repro|steps to reproduce|how to reproduce/i);
+    // Verify report has date/version footer (agent may format differently)
+    expect(logContent).toMatch(/date.*2026|2026.*date/i);
 
     // Clean up
     try { fs.rmSync(contribDir, { recursive: true, force: true }); } catch {}


@@ 424,16 435,20 @@ describeE2E('QA skill E2E', () => {
 
   test('/qa quick completes without browse errors', async () => {
     const result = await runSkillTest({
-      prompt: `You have a browse binary at ${browseBin}. Assign it to B variable like: B="${browseBin}"
+      prompt: `B="${browseBin}"
+
+The test server is already running at: ${testServer.url}
+Target page: ${testServer.url}/basic.html
 
 Read the file qa/SKILL.md for the QA workflow instructions.
 
 Run a Quick-depth QA test on ${testServer.url}/basic.html
 Do NOT use AskUserQuestion — run Quick tier directly.
+Do NOT try to start a server or discover ports — the URL above is ready.
 Write your report to ${qaDir}/qa-reports/qa-report.md`,
       workingDirectory: qaDir,
       maxTurns: 35,
-      timeout: 180_000,
+      timeout: 240_000,
       testName: 'qa-quick',
       runId,
     });


@@ 448,7 463,7 @@ Write your report to ${qaDir}/qa-reports/qa-report.md`,
     }
     // Accept error_max_turns — the agent doing thorough QA work is not a failure
     expect(['success', 'error_max_turns']).toContain(result.exitReason);
-  }, 240_000);
+  }, 300_000);
 });
 
 // --- B5: Review skill E2E ---

@@ 496,6 496,44 @@ describe('v0.4.1 preamble features', () => {
   }
 });
 
+// --- Contributor mode preamble structure validation ---
+
+describe('Contributor mode preamble structure', () => {
+  const skillsWithPreamble = [
+    'SKILL.md', 'browse/SKILL.md', 'qa/SKILL.md',
+    'qa-only/SKILL.md',
+    'setup-browser-cookies/SKILL.md',
+    'ship/SKILL.md', 'review/SKILL.md',
+    'plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md', 'plan-eng-review/SKILL.md',
+    'retro/SKILL.md',
+  ];
+
+  for (const skill of skillsWithPreamble) {
+    test(`${skill} has 0-10 rating in contributor mode`, () => {
+      const content = fs.readFileSync(path.join(ROOT, skill), 'utf-8');
+      expect(content).toContain('0 to 10');
+      expect(content).toContain('My rating');
+    });
+
+    test(`${skill} has calibration example`, () => {
+      const content = fs.readFileSync(path.join(ROOT, skill), 'utf-8');
+      expect(content).toContain('Calibration');
+      expect(content).toContain('the bar');
+    });
+
+    test(`${skill} has "what would make this a 10" field`, () => {
+      const content = fs.readFileSync(path.join(ROOT, skill), 'utf-8');
+      expect(content).toContain('What would make this a 10');
+    });
+
+    test(`${skill} uses periodic reflection (not per-command)`, () => {
+      const content = fs.readFileSync(path.join(ROOT, skill), 'utf-8');
+      expect(content).toContain('workflow step');
+      expect(content).not.toContain('After you use gstack-provided CLIs');
+    });
+  }
+});
+
 describe('Enum & Value Completeness in review checklist', () => {
   const checklist = fs.readFileSync(path.join(ROOT, 'review', 'checklist.md'), 'utf-8');